“So, if AJ takes decongestants and antihistamines to combat his cold, will he be guilty of taking performance enhancing drugs?”
I wouldn’t use the work “guilty” due to implication, but in principle the answer to your question is yes.
I am not at all saying there are not “degrees” that should not be observed. My point is we demonize some things and look the other way on others.
Again, to shift the relative argument to an area more palpable, in principle explain me to the difference creating a drug that enhances the human body’s ability to perform physical tasks, and performing surgery and then drugs to do the same?
stuckey – You’re right, I can’t argue with that. But then I really think every athlete should be pumped up. At least I’d be getting more bang for my buck. Cause I’ve really never concerned myself with how players stack up from generation to generation, thats just a fans game to play. I look at professional athletes the way I do everything/everyone else I’m entertained by, as clowns. They are very highly paid clowns, here for the amusement and entertainment of us, the adoring public. So maybe instead of being anti-steroids I’ll change my position to be in support of full fledged bionic players. And again, I’m really not being snarky, I just feel like if I’m paying to be entertained, I might as well be REALLY entertained.
I am stuck with no access to the chat as well. Also without Flash I cannot tell if my new computer has shipped yet. Its a cruel world.
I wouldn’t call decongestants and antihistimines any sort of performance enhancing drugs. Those can make him throw the ball the right way and not get flustered if he hits someone or give up a home run.
“Pitchers seemed to rave about Rothschild this spring. He helped Hughes learn a slider in a week, he worked with Chamberlain’s slightly altered mechanics and he seems to have really formed a bond with Burnett. A.J. talked several times about not feeling the need to think and worry on the mound, because he’d grown to trust that Rothschild would notice if he was doing something wrong and needed to make a change. Wednesday March 30, 2011 1:24″
stuckey – I felt I had to point that out because I know for a lot of people the crux of the argument over steroids is sorta based around how the numbers hold up, etc. Those things never concerned me because of the very reasons you mentioned.
I’ve just always felt that with the spotlight comes the heat… And I think the heat, in this case, is well deserved, regardless of one’s view of necessary medication/medical procedures vs. elective enhancements.
Gammons may love the Sox, but he is not anti-Yankee and absolutely nothing he said yesterday could be construed that way. He said both teams had their flaws, that a scout he talked to said he picked the Yanks to win the division and he thinks that the difference between the two teams could come down to AJ and Beckett.
stuckey – I know what you mean but you’re just arguing semantics here. If a guy tears a ligament in his elbow, he can’t pitch. He needs it fixed. That is a necessary procedure. You could of course argue the guy could get a different job and it isn’t necessary in the sense that he would drop dead if he didn’t fix it, but by all means for a pitcher who tears a tendon in his elbow, in order to keep his job, its necessary.
“They should legalize roids, but put an age regulation on it Luke booze.
LGY, I’m personally an advocate of letting any person we deem of adult age do whatever the hell they want to themselves, and simply stiffen the penalties for anyone committing a crime onto another under the influence of their drug of choice.
The instantaneous boon to society would be immeasurable.
Also fine with league like the ML’s making whatever the hell rules they like. If they want to make steroids against the rules, fine by me.
i just have an issue with the misplaced indignation over it.
And no, I’m not trying to create a distraction so no one notices I am officially wrong about Gardner…
Im not one of these people that thinks if you took steroids you should be banned from the HOF forever by any means…. but I think there is a gray area between that and what you’re talking about where the answer lies.
Wait so Boston won the offseason again?….I thought they just replaced two good players with two slightly better players…..
“If a guy tears a ligament in his elbow, he can’t pitch. He needs it fixed. That is a necessary procedure. You could of course argue the guy could get a different job and it isn’t necessary in the sense that he would drop dead if he didn’t fix it, but by all means for a pitcher who tears a tendon in his elbow, in order to keep his job, its necessary.”
Shame, it’s semantics to a degree. But what about the career minor leaguer who doesn’t do any one thing well enough and was an unlikely candidate to make the majors, but steriods increased his power or fastball enough to finally get there? He needed it to get and keep the job?
Where do we draw the line? Different set of rules for a guy who MADE the majors on his own assumed natural ability and then suffers an injury that will never allow him to perform up to his pre-injury ability?
And how bout non-catastrophic injuries? I mean I don’t think most people know cortisone IS a steriod. Cortisone isn’t the dividing line between being physically able and unable to pitch, it’s the difference between a level of performance and pain.